Law Case
The court proceeding evaluated and assessed in this paper happened on 27 June 2018, one hour, thirty-five minutes, and two seconds. It is a court proceeding that happened in California regarding a child murder case. To understand a court proceeding is impartial with success and zero anxiety whenever an individual is presented within a court of law, whether as the offender or as a witness (Nylund, Anna, and Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde, 202). It equips anyone with the right skills to be in a court in real-time without causing disaster or interrupting the proceedings in ways that can lend someone to jail. Visiting a court on a regular basis equips someone with first-hand information that they would otherwise not gain from anywhere else. The paper is purposed on highlighting the scenarios observed in the court of law as the trail is going, reviewing, and stating what was learned from the experience.
Upon the court proceedings, I observed a voir dire, Frenching meaning of an oath to tell nothing but the truth, and an opening statement by the attorney. In the opening statement, the attorney states briefly and in a clear way, what the already appointed jury will hear from the witness and the evidence to be produced before the court. In this case, we have all the witnesses against the offender who is thought to have assaulted a child. Mrs. Jones, the lady who appeared first to give the witnesses, goes through the voir dire to ascertain the court that she will speak nothing else but the truth, which will help with the proceedings.
The already observed vior dire and opening statement and the prosecutor’s confrontation and case connect to the bigger picture of what is happening in the court. Testimonials and opening statements from the attorney are among the initial steps that occur when a trail is going on within the court. They tie together the whole process and make it easier for the information to flow smoothly, and at the same time, eliminate confusion in the court of law. For an instant, we can feel everyone is waiting for the attorney’s words so that the court can open and progress realized. From a personal point of view, this step is the most important one in any proceeding. The attorney’s voice depicts a theme of the matter to becoming official in nature and drawing everyone’s attention.
The legal problem presented in the proceeding revolves around a murdered child. The child is believed to be murdered by gangs related to the uncle, who is presented in the court. This is a legal problem because all the parties are disputing against the individual who killed the child, and no party is up to confess the killing. We can also say that it is a legal case since killing is prohibited by the state’s laws and is punishable at all costs. To punish an offender who is thought to have committed murder, the evidence must be sought and provided in the court to be proven guilty in undoubted ways. It is what the jury is pushing to provide so that the criminal offender can be punished dearly.
Legal subjects such as torts appear evidently within the proceeding. Based on what the witnesses communicate about, we can confidently conclude that the child was killed by gangs who never thought of what they were doing and just minding their lives. The gangs bring out the idea of a tort by only minding about themselves and disregarding other people’s lives, which is more likely seen as an accident. Committing a tort brings a lot of suffering to the claimant, who is mourning her child’s death, which is very debilitating.
Various ramifications emerge from the proceeding. Most of them emanate from the bunch of men who appear before the court, more so the gangs believed to have murdered the child. The court appears messy, and we can see the judge commanding people to behave where the judge does not overlook the uncouth behavior of the people within the court. The gang’s behavior within the court shows the actions of illiterate people who cannot stand to respect other people’s lives. We can see foodstuffs in the court as if the proceedings were heard in a restaurant. The judge is teaching people how to behave decently within the court and is seen warning the cameraman about his behavior (Law and Crime Network 00:40-1:25).
In the same stanza, the attorney also brings some actions that are worth exposure. The attorney is communicating in slang and calling people by their nicknames. This is not a behavior to expect in a court of law where everything should be official. The attorney tries to persuade the court that his client is not a victim and is innocent. He proves how he is innocent by providing information that shows he was not present in the time of the child’s murder. By doing this, the attorney purposes in providing a safe avenue to his client and, in all ways, assure that they will not be convicted.
As a juror, I would have distinctly handled the case, although not completely alleviating from what the jury has provided. By the jury’s work, which is to seek evidence in an attempt to provide factual evidence in the court of law, I would go ahead and look for more tangible evidence in the field. Before the court, I would produce evidence such as the tools used to commit murder and the fingerprints so that the criminal offender can be convicted based on the grounds that even the attorney could not disagree. This would mean linking discreetly with people who were there when the crime happened, and at times seeking the help of the security feeds if they were available.
As a lawyer, I would do my work as a defense lawyer to protect the offender through all viable ways. Although there is evidence that the individual murdered the victim, the lawyer’s work remains to protect the client and prove that they are not guilty. At times, the concept of humanity sets in and undermines an individual’s thinking, which can make someone go against his professionalism in some ways. I would not completely protect my client through this path, bearing in mind that they killed an innocent child, and I would philosophize about the same. The gang killed an innocent person who would have become someone respectable and respectful in the future, and at the same time, the gang is disrespectful and does not consider others’ lives.
As a judge, appointed with the supreme role of maintaining order in a court of law, I would not condone ill-mannered behavior. First, I would ban those individuals who disrespect the court and punish them who brought foodstuff to the court. Calling out and punishing bad behavior is part of upholding the law and making sure that people are obliged to follow. When observing and critically listening to the proceedings, there is some sound in the background that resembles a radio. As a judge, I would not have correlated. From the proceedings, I learned that as far as the court is interpreted as a no jokes environment, jokes that emanate from the attorney could be hard to control, such as the attorney using slang language. I also learned that the judge should be tough to keep the court proceedings flowing and pure.
The information provided in this essay can be succinctly summarized. It is important to visit a court and learn from the proceedings in real-time. Learning that originates from such a visit can positively impact someone’s life. The jury is tasked with finding out the complete evidence and presenting it before the court. Witnesses should be kept anonymous for their safety since they might be followed after the court is adjourned. A child’s life is important to everyone, and we should not be ashamed to testify against such actions.
References
Law and Crime Network. “Toddler Murder Trial Day 1 Part 2 Shante Jones Testifies.” YouTube, uploaded by Law and Crime Network26 June 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=dITxs9GOn-0
Nylund, Anna, and Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde. “Courts and Court Proceedings.” Nordic Law in European Context. Springer, Cham, 2019. 201-213.